Back in the old days, judges warned jurors to stay away from newspapers and dictionaries and not to discuss their case around the family dinner table or with friends.
Those were the good ole days, judges and lawyers say.
The days before Google, Twitter, MySpace, Facebook, Wikipedia and MapQuest opened up the world for all to see, and before BlackBerries and iPhones became an ubiquitous part of everyday life.
Two weeks ago, a domestic-violence victim in California tracked down a juror in her boyfriend’s trial through MySpace to try to convince her to acquit the man.
The juror turned the girlfriend in, the man was convicted and now the girlfriend may end up behind bars herself.
In another case, an Arkansas juror in a civil case posted this — “Just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else’s money” — on his Twitter account during deliberations.
In yet another example, a Florida judge learned nine out of 12 jurors in a federal drug case had been spending their spare time doing research on the Internet. The judge had to declare a mistrial after eight weeks of testimony.
The examples have become so prevalent that Jan Kearney, the presiding judge of Pima County Superior Court, has called on other members of the bench to come up with steps they might take to prevent similar problems here.
Eventually, Kearney said, she’d like to form a committee of attorneys, judges and citizens to discuss the issues.
Who should be allowed to carry electronic devices into the courthouse? Should the standard admonishment now read to juries be changed? How should people be punished for violating a judge’s order? Those are just some of the questions Kearney wants settled in the coming months.
“We need to have a way to address the issue to ensure that everyone receives a fair trial,” Kearney said.
During trials, jurors…